| Title |
Static self-directed sample dispensing into a series of reaction wells on a microfluidic card for parallel genetic detection of microbial pathogens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomedical Microdevices, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10544-015-9994-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert D. Stedtfeld, Yen-Cheng Liu, Tiffany M. Stedtfeld, Tanja Kostic, Maggie Kronlein, Onnop Srivannavit, Walid T. Khalife, James M. Tiedje, Erdogan Gulari, Mary Hughes, Brett Etchebarne, Syed A. Hashsham |
| Abstract |
A microfluidic card is described for simultaneous and rapid genetic detection of multiple microbial pathogens. The hydrophobic surface of native acrylic and a novel microfluidic mechanism termed "airlock" were used to dispense sample into a series of 64 reaction wells without the use of valves, external pumping peripherals, multiple layers, or vacuum assistance. This airlock mechanism was tested with dilutions of whole human blood, saliva, and urine, along with mock samples of varying viscosities and surface tensions. Samples spiked with genomic DNA (gDNA) or crude lysates from clinical bacterial isolates were tested with loop mediated isothermal amplification assays (LAMP) designed to target virulence and antibiotic resistance genes. Reactions were monitored in real time using the Gene-Z, which is a portable smartphone-driven system. Samples loaded correctly into the microfluidic card in 99.3 % of instances. Amplification results confirmed no carryover of pre-dispensed primer between wells during sample loading, and no observable diffusion between adjacent wells during the 60 to 90 min isothermal reaction. Sensitivity was comparable between LAMP reactions tested within the microfluidic card and in conventional vials. Tests demonstrate that the airlock card works with various sample types, manufacturing techniques, and can potentially be used in many point-of-care diagnostics applications. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Nepal | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 20% |
| Researcher | 11 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 11 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 12% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 20 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 July 2022.
All research outputs
#6,017,059
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#194
of 747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,910
of 264,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 747 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,508 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.